header-logo header-logo

14 April 2011 / Michael Feakes
Issue: 7461 + 7462 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

End of the road for success fees?

The Sousa decision provides important clarification of the operation of conditional fee agreements, says Michael Feakes

Litigation funding is rarely out of the legal news at present. The Jackson Report in early 2010 suggested widespread changes to the way much litigation is funded, and the government has announced plans to implement Jackson’s proposals wholesale. In a recent case, the Court of Appeal had the opportunity to achieve one of Jackson’s aims, and abolish the recoverability of certain success fees. The court’s decision provides important clarification of the operation of conditional fee agreements (CFAs).

The circumstances leading to the case of Sousa v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2011] EWCA Civ 194 were straightforward. Sousa claimed his house was damaged by subsidence when nearby trees extracted moisture from the ground underneath. His home insurers paid for the repairs, and then sought to recover their money from the owners of the trees, the defendant local council. To do this, the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll